Please Boycott EA games. The company needs to be put to re..

Please read all this. There is alot. For the good of all gamers and the industry EA needs to go down in flames.I could not find a good link to the recent Ubisoft hostile takeover bid by EA if anyone has one please add.

Because it seems with the larger and larger companies (and fewer small gamemakers) you lose the nich games and quality goes out the door... more than it already has if that's possible. If there's only one company left... where else are you going to get your games from . EA is already on my 6 month list. I don't buy any EA games until 6 months after they come out because you'll want the patches. Simcity 4 never had the bugs ironed out, thank goodness for the fan base who did the fixes themselves.

> Please read all this. There is alot. For the good of all gamers and the > industry EA needs to go down in flames.

i'm with youi'm very worried about ea becoming unhealthy bigi'm very worried about the ubisoft hostile takeoveri now see ea as a menace to pc gamesand i completely agree with you that ea has to be stoped for the good ofpc games and pc gamers

i guess valve and steam wasn't already enough worries we now have ea toonot easy the life of pc gamers nowadays

"Mom" <momspamhjy6678@bjr.com> wrote in messagenews:a2WGd.104363$6l.29567@pd7tw2no...> Please read all this. There is alot. For the good of all gamers and the> industry EA needs to go down in flames.> I could not find a good link to the recent Ubisoft hostile takeover bid by> EA if anyone has one please add.

The gist of the article: woman's husband has to work long hard hours for EA.

This was pretty thoroughly discussed here about a month or so ago. I thinkthe big thing here is that in any company the size of EA you are bound tofind one or two people who aren't happy with their lot in life. Since nospecific information or proof is offered and its an anonymous post (by theEA employees spouse, not the employee himself) its hard to really tell ifwhat the woman in the article is saying is true or a gross exaggeration orwhat.

For all we know, the husband could be working only 6 hours a day for EA andthen spends 5 or 6 hours each night with his mistress or out drinking orplaying games with his buddies and just tells his wife that he was workinglate yet again... and then say that EA is just a bunch of cheap bastardsbecause there is no overtime or extra benefits on his paycheque for thoseextra hours he "works" every day. No, thats probably not the case, but thepoint is that without any proof or a complaint from the person themself itsreally hard to for anybody to say whats true and whats not and for EA todefend themselves against the accusations (since they don't know who the"spouse" is they can't even verify if a real employee is involved here andits not just some flake writing a fake article because they bought a gameand then found it $5 cheaper at Best Buy a week later and couldn't return itto get the cheaper version)

What this is going to really boil down to is: If you don't like it then whydon't you quit and find something else to do or try another company? If thearticle is true then you would think that with his finger in so many pies atEA and so much responsibility and hard work he must have quite theimpressive resume/portfolio and should be able to go to another company.

But one would have to ask as well: If this is typical then why, with acompany the size of EA, is there only 1 complaint out there?

If your favorite NFL game was something not produced by EA then I could seesomebody being upset... but this is the real world here: companies have doneexclusive deals in the past and they will in the future.

Just sticking with the NFL: CBS and FOX have exclusive deals with the NFLas far as broadcasting the games go... so if ESPN, ABC or NBC are yourfavorite stations you are out of luck, you aren't going to see an AFC gameon ABC or NBC showing the NFC

This is just how licensing works... if somebody has the rights to somethingits their perogative to sell it to somebody else for as much as they can getfor it... EA is as much "in the wrong" as the NFL is since it takes 2parties to make a contract, and since the NFL is the one who decides "yes"or "no" on exclusivity and its their right to, they can't be in the wrong.That means that EA, who simply had enough money to pay for the rights isn'twrong.

The gist of the article: EA CEO is #4 on list of "computer game industryjerks" list

Citing this article as an example really ruins any credibility the previoustwo articles had... the guy that wrote this article comes across as #1 onthe list of "biggest jerks writing articles about the game industry" andsounds like a real crackpot.

Just looking at who else is on the list:

#1) George Broussard.Reason on list: because he is taking forever to release "Duke NukemForever".

Like thats *never* happened before in this industry.

#2) Derek SmartReason on list: Writer doesn't like his games and when Derek Smart wasposting on various usenet groups and internet message boards defending hisgames against detractors he often got caught up in flame wars.

This just shows that anybody involved in a flame war usually ends up lookingbad... its not so bad when you are anonymous (like almost everybody onusenet is) but when people can actually tie you to something or to a companyit can damage your rep in your field (not just game developers, buteverybody). Personally I never played his games, but I like the idea of agame developer actually coming around and talking to the people who boughtand played their games and gathering input and opinions instead of amarketing focus group or company playtesters.

#3) John Romero & Stevie CaseReason on list: John Romero: Daikatana was a big budget game that flopped...Romero looks like a game designer and didn't go with the more corporate"suit" look.Reason on list: Stevie Case: she is a good looking woman.

What can you say? So the poster has a fear of attractive women and presumesthat they get anywhere through sexual favors... and would have preferredJohn Romero stuck to making Doom and Quake. I'm sure if he had done nothingbut Doom and Quake maybe we would be on Doom 6 and Quake 5 by now but he'dprobably still be on the list for something like "not branching out intoother aspects of gaming" or "flogging a dead horse over and over again"

So whats the moral of the story: Its bad to be big.

The goal of all companies is to expand and grow, and to produce profit thatwill allow it to expand and grow even further. As people run around andcomplain about these things happening they seem to lose sight of alot ofthings that make up the big picture...

1) If every game company was just "4 or 5 good buddies who went to schooltogether" that would not equate to a better product on the market or moregames. Games would probably be fewer and far between and nowhere near aspolished as they are now.... and when it came to support you could forgetabout it.

2) If every game company worked on a tight budget and barely realised aprofit then the whole industry would have pretty much collapsed on itself...because every company would be subject to complete collapse if they put outa bad game, or even a good game that wasn't a commercial success.

3) If every game company was just 4 or 5 people working away then life forthose designers would be tougher than whats portrayed in the EA Spousearticle - because they would have to work 20+ hours a day to meet anydeadlines. The game industry isn't like it was 20 years ago when 2 or 3friends could crank out a game for the Commodore 64 or Apple II and make afew bucks off it... gamers want cutting edge graphics, gameplay, storylines, etc... something that just 3 or 4 people alone can't do in areasonable amount of time.

4) If every game company was just 4 or 5 people and still strived to comeout with games that were as quality as they are today then games would befew and far between. If a game takes 100,000 "man hours" to design, developand test then a big company can assign 100 people "over the projectslifetime" to work on the project and come out with a finished product inunder a year... if it was just 5 people working away then even putting in 20hours a day it would take them 4 years to make a game.

5) By being big, companies are able to hire people to fill specific needs:script writers, storyline developers, graphic designers, voice talent, etc.This leads to a better and more polished product in the end.... look atgames from the 80s: sure we had fun playing games like Ultima 4/5,Wasteland, the gold box D&D games... but you look at what they became whenthe companies involved grew and got bigger and could afford betterdesigners, voice talent, script writers and better graphics designers:Ultima 7/Ultima Online, Fallout 1 & 2, Baldur's Gate 1 & 2

In the end people may not agree with EA's policy of buying an exclusive dealwith the NFL or buying smaller companies to expand its holdings or bringtalented writers and developers into the company fold... but it is thenatural evolution of a game company, or any company for that matter, andgone are the days when a game company was a bunch of computer geeks whose"office" was in their parents' basement... big bucks are involved now inthis field, where a smash hit can lead to tens or hundreds of millions ofdollars in revenue and its every business' right to grow and expand.

"difool" <john.difool@mail.telepac.pt> wrote in message news:jmqpu0d1r9v3ftrcircenvke9ire4egj2s@4ax.com...> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, "Mom" wrote:>>> Please read all this. There is alot. For the good of all gamers and the>> industry EA needs to go down in flames.>> i'm with you> i'm very worried about ea becoming unhealthy big> i'm very worried about the ubisoft hostile takeover> i now see ea as a menace to pc games> and i completely agree with you that ea has to be stoped for the good of> pc games and pc gamers

EA Games - ruin everything.

A company run by accountants, not people who have any affection for games (rather like the major record companies). I began a personal boycott not so long ago. Every game they release is just eminently shruggable and is never going to make me gasp - so I just don't buy. They even managed to ruin C&C. Just say no, kids.

> Please read all this. There is alot. For the good of all gamers and> the industry EA needs to go down in flames.> I could not find a good link to the recent Ubisoft hostile takeover> bid by EA if anyone has one please add.

EA has been scum for a long time. I've already been boycotting them.

Well, except for Medal of Honor. But that game rocked.

As a rule, though, I rarely even look at EA's games. It's got to blow me away to even consider it, and even then I think twice.

>>> Mom wrote:>>> Please read all this. There is alot. For the good of all gamers and>>> the industry EA needs to go down in flames.>>> I could not find a good link to the recent Ubisoft hostile takeover>>> bid by EA if anyone has one please add.>>> >>> >>> http://www.livejournal.com/users/ea_spouse/>>> >>> http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/041213/135991_1.html>>> >>> http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=1507>>> >>> >> >> The French being French it is highly unlikely that the French>> Government will allow the take over to take place.>> >> That said - why is it a problem anyway?>> >>Because it seems with the larger and larger companies (and fewer small >gamemakers) you lose the nich games and quality goes out the door... more >than it already has if that's possible. If there's only one company >left... where else are you going to get your games from . EA is already >on my 6 month list. I don't buy any EA games until 6 months after they >come out because you'll want the patches.

Er... please name any significant recent PC game from anydeveloper/distributor that has not required patching....

> Simcity 4 never had the bugs >ironed out, thank goodness for the fan base who did the fixes themselves.>>

Better postpone any purchase of Battlefield 2 then...........

or Crytek's ( Far Cry) next offering....

A very sound economical move, I may say, since not only will you get the latest patch, but prices will have fallen significantly and many user-reviews will guide you in your purchase-choices.

>>Because it seems with the larger and larger companies (and fewer small>>gamemakers) you lose the nich games and quality goes out the door...>>more than it already has if that's possible. If there's only one>>company left... where else are you going to get your games from . >>EA is already on my 6 month list. I don't buy any EA games until 6>>months after they come out because you'll want the patches. > > Er... please name any significant recent PC game from any> developer/distributor that has not required patching....

Unfortunately there aren't any, just with them it's more of needing patches as opposed to fixup patches, patches fixing major gameplay issues as opposed to just cleanups. Sim City 4 had all this talk about it's new traffic code and it was just as bad as the prior SimCity, it was the fan base that actually fixed the code so highways where actually used etc. It's still buggy but as soon as it's mostly working, it's onto the expansion instead (where there's more money of course) with the remaining problems never fixed.

> Better postpone any purchase of Battlefield 2 then...........> > or Crytek's ( Far Cry) next offering....> > A very sound economical move, I may say, since not only will you > get the latest patch, but prices will have fallen significantly and > many user-reviews will guide you in your purchase-choices.> > John Lewis

Yeah that to . I never got anything without seeing reviews, unless it was from really trusted makers (eg, the BalderGate series).

Pete wrote:> john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis) wrote in> news:41ee122d.47353751@news.verizon.net: > > >>>Because it seems with the larger and larger companies (and fewer small>>>gamemakers) you lose the nich games and quality goes out the door...>>>more than it already has if that's possible. If there's only one>>>company left... where else are you going to get your games from . >>>EA is already on my 6 month list. I don't buy any EA games until 6>>>months after they come out because you'll want the patches. >>>>Er... please name any significant recent PC game from any>>developer/distributor that has not required patching....> > > > Unfortunately there aren't any, just with them it's more of needing patches > as opposed to fixup patches, patches fixing major gameplay issues as > opposed to just cleanups.

Can you explain this and how you come to this conclusion? Keeping in minf that patches for anything can be applied using binary difference files are often no different in size.

> Pete wrote:>> john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis) wrote in>> news:41ee122d.47353751@news.verizon.net: >> >> >>>>Because it seems with the larger and larger companies (and fewer>>>>small gamemakers) you lose the nich games and quality goes out the>>>>door... more than it already has if that's possible. If there's>>>>only one company left... where else are you going to get your games>>>>from . EA is already on my 6 month list. I don't buy any EA games>>>>until 6 months after they come out because you'll want the patches. >>>>>>Er... please name any significant recent PC game from any>>>developer/distributor that has not required patching....>> >> >> >> Unfortunately there aren't any, just with them it's more of needing>> patches as opposed to fixup patches, patches fixing major gameplay>> issues as opposed to just cleanups.> > Can you explain this and how you come to this conclusion? Keeping in > minf that patches for anything can be applied using binary difference > files are often no different in size.>

Eh?! Like I said, depending on whether it's fixing up major gameplay issues or not. I don't need to compare patch sizes or such to find that out, I get that with just the patch readme and playing the game. If the release is so bad I end up putting it aside until it's fixed, I call that a needed patch and inexcusable (imo). If it's just anoying but still perfectly playable then it's a cleanup. I'm also more lenient with hardware issues (as I know that's difficult to test with the unlimited number of different hardware combos) than gameplay issues that should have been caught in beta.

There's stuff that fall inbetween and what is my limit for bugs is different by others, but it's nothing to do with the patch size, number of issues etc. as that is different between games and/or even game types.